Good Leader and Bad Leader

Lord Rama dictated Hanuman to locate Sita. He located Sita and also incinerated Lanka which was not dictated by Rama. Rama was not happy with the decision taken by Hanuman to incinerate Lanka. Since then, Hanuman did not take any decision of his own. Rama understood this; he wanted to create leadership in Hanuman and power of volition. This happened, when Ahiravan, Ravana` s brother, kidnapped Rama and his brother Laxman to subterranean. Everyone was dumbfounded on Rama and Laxman where about.  Hanuman`s anxiety had not bound. No one was there to guide him and give decision to Hanuman to execute. Hanuman had no other way but to take his own decision. In this incident, Hanuman took his own decision and killed Ahiravana and saved both Rama and Laxman from the clinch of Ahiravana. Rama became very happy and appreciated his decision and leadership quality. In this way, Rama instigated the leader in Hanuman. This is the example of good leader. Indra always takes the credit of the work done by others, and he never wants someone to be leader and take his position. That is why he always remains in constant fear and make his companion to live in fear. This is the example of bad leader.

There is either good leader or bad leader, there is nothing concept like 50-50 in leadership. A good leader always creates new leader and bad leader creates followers. A good leader looks confident, knowledgeable, honest and sincere. Good leader looks for the improvements, gives opportunity to everyone to prove their skill, and never tries to balk or demoralize his companions. He tries to motivate and recognize the companions in various ways. He creates the multiple opportunities to prove ones hidden talent. You cannot motivate anyone until and unless you are  motivated. You cannot understand the values of the talent and skill of someone unless you  possess some unique talent. Leader should have the indomitable confident to take the decision in critical situation and its execution till success. Good leader keep working on his new skill and talent, he does not like to be stagnant. He gives opportunity to his companions to take their own decision in some particular situations. Under the good leadership, there is always flow of mutual respect among the companions. On the contrast, the bad leader tries to instill fear in the companions and satisfies himself in self-complacency and misuses his position. He never analyses the companion’s talent and skill and remains self-centered. He gets easily perturbed once the critical situation occurs, where it is required taking some strong decision. He himself is scared to lose his position, and hence put pressure to his companions even though, it is not required. He remains confused when to reprimand and when to reward. There could not the scarcity for the sycophantic member in his team; people may respect him in front of him, but would be imprecating behind his back. He may consider that, due to my skill and talent and work, people are respecting me. This is not the real respect. The real respect is that which is given even behind your back. That is only worth respect you deserve. The good leader introspects himself frequently about his position and justification of the same. He always remains ready to know his own feedback to improve, if anything can be done to make it better. The bad leader only remains interested in giving the feedback to others, and reluctant to take his own feedback from others. Good leader delegate the task and bad leader dictate the task. Good leader takes the blame of his companions on his head if anything goes wrong, and gives the credit to the companions for the good work. The bad leader does the reverse.